A question about Baha'u'llah's title with regard to the Bab (ritual, procreation)

[Adib]

I know that Baha'u'llah gave himself that title at the Conference of Badasht in 1848 - which I believe is the same year the Bab sent His Suriy-Haykal to Baha'u'llah - and I once heard that the Bab Himself actually confirmed the validity of Baha'u'llah's self-proclaimed title. Can anyone validate this tidbit?

[arthra]

You can read about this in the first volume of Revelation of Baha'u'llah by Adib Taherzadeh and in Balyuzi's "Baha'u'llah The King of Glory"... but the source is Nabil-i-Azam:

"To each of those who had convened at Badasht a special Tablet was subsequently reveale dby the Bab each of whom He addressed by the name recently conferred upon him."

- The Dawn Breakers p. 293 (US edition)

Jinab-i-Baha was the title that Mirza Husayn Ali subsequently became known as in the Babi community after the Conference of Badasht.

- Art

[Adib]

Thanks very much.

[arthra]

Your welcome Adib..

There was a "Surih i Haykal" which Baha'u'llah revealed while in Edirne and Akka around 1869. You can check it out at the Baha'i Academics Research Library:

http://bahai-library.com/index.php5

- Art

[BruceDLimber]

Hi!

I've always heard that it was more that the Bab awarded Him the title than that He took it Himself!

And this fits the overall pattern whereby the Bab awareded each Letter of the Living a new name, such as Qarrat'ul-Ayn ("Solace of the eyes") that of Tahirih ("The Pure").

Peace,

Bruce

[Popeyesays]

The title by which Baha'u'llah was known to the Babi's was "Baha" usually preceded by the honorific "Jinabi"--"Jinab'i Baha". His birth name was Mirza Husayn Ali al Nuri. It was during the Baghdad exile that the full title "Baha'u'llah" became common.

Regards,
Scott

[Adib]

Alright, thanks again for clearing up that issue guys.

Now I have another clarification request regarding probably the most controversial standpoint of the Baha'i Faith: homosexuality. (Didn't think I should make another topic - and for the record, I'm not a homosexual)
I know exactly where we stand on it - Baha'is can be gay but not openly practicing, else they run the risk of expulsion from the Faith. I've read nearly everything about this subject that Shoghi Effendi and the House have ordained - homosexuality is a spiritual abberration and a Baha'i should try his hardest to overcome it, the friends should be supportive of these people, etc. But let's say you were talking to a homosexual about the Baha'i Faith, they ask you about our viewpoint on homosexuality, and we give it to them. An awkward conversation is likely to ensue, so how do we justify it? This is all I can think of:

1. Marriage should be between man and a woman, that's just the way we see it (not to mention there's a quote about the details of matrimony and its immutability from `Abdu'l-Baha - which I don't have handy - but regardless I feel that this is far from convincing for a homosexual)

2. Homosexuality is just another test that one may be faced with in life (I would liken it to alcoholism and drug abuse, but those afflictions are entirely self-induced and that isn't always the case with homosexuality). But then the person could say, "How is it a test for me? I love the lifestyle and I'm perfectly happy with it," and in response, a heterosexual could try to argue that procreation and among other perks of heterosexuality ultimately bring more happiness to a person, and that argument could easily be ended by pointing out the subjectivity of happiness.

3. Homosexuality has been condemned in all of the former divine religions and to this date, so that sexual orientation is not in accordance with God's will. In addition, the Baha'i Faith is by and large more lax on this subject than any of the previous dispensations, thus proving our progressiveness as a new divine religion (to which they could say, "well if you're so progressive, then why do you insist on continuing that one trend started by past creeds?" To that, we would just refer back to the bit about God's will. Or maybe this whole thing is a classic example of a straw man fallacy, but I'm not focused enough to acknowledge any possibility of that right now)

It's a very controversial topic and, in my opinion, the hardest to defend in the field of Baha'i apologetics. In what way would you guys personally try to qualify our belief on homosexuality (at least among Baha'is) and perhaps justify some of the seemingly harsh statements made by Shoghi Effendi and the House? I sometimes feel like I'm the only heterosexual Baha'i who accepts this ordinance as a fact of the Faith but still feels uneasy about aspects of it. I just feel like I've been thrown off-balance as of late since I've dwelled on this particular issue, as it's the only one that gives me any grief whatsoever. Not to make this sound like a therapy session or anything.

[Popeyesays]

There are some tests that are life long struggles. You can't minimize it.

It is not up to Baha'is to peek in anyone's windows and see how they live, but if some things come to puoblic knowledge the faith itself can be damaged by making allowanbces for one Baha'i we are not willing to make for another.

Regards,
Scott

[BruceDLimber]

Greetings, Adib! :-)

You have already given the various answers for this question yourself (as I trust you realize)!

Peace,

Bruce

[arthra]

Adib wrote:

"It's a very controversial topic and, in my opinion, the hardest to defend in the field of Baha'i apologetics..."

My reply:

I don't think it's a hard point to defend though.. Yes most modern mental health people in the US don't have a diagnostric title for homosexuality...

The earlier therapies were based more on psychoanalysis which considered homosexuality a case of arrested developement... or a stage in human psycho sexual developement. All we know about in the Writings is that practising homosexuality is forbidden.. We can't change that... there's a lot of human conditions that are not endorsed by the Writings...

It may be that therapies will further develope in mental health areas and we'll see another change in diagnoses...

- Art